Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Campaign flaps may pass by law

Prosecution, fine might not occur in cases linked to aide

By Chris Barge, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published April 17, 2008 at 11 p.m.

Text size  
Greg Kolomitz ran Ritter's 2006 campaign for governor.

Greg Kolomitz ran Ritter's 2006 campaign for governor.

Related Links

More Colorado Government

More stories »

Map my news

The former campaign manager Gov. Bill Ritter publicly disowned and accused of writing himself and his company $83,250 worth of unauthorized checks may never face criminal charges, legal experts say.

Also, the Ritter administration may never be fined for violating campaign finance laws, despite an audit that found Greg Kolomitz improperly paid $217,164.56 in campaign bills with money donated for the Democratic governor's inauguration.

Arapahoe County District Attorney Carol Chambers will have her work cut out in building a theft or embezzlement case against Kolomitz, said Scott Gessler, a lawyer for Republican candidates and ballot issues.

"It's going to be a lot harder to press charges than people may be thinking," he said.

For one thing, Ritter and Kolomitz never signed a contract for Kolomitz's work on the campaign or for his handling the inauguration fund. Therefore no document exists to back up Ritter's statement that he never authorized Kolomitz to pay himself anything out of the inauguration fund.

Ritter said he clearly remembers reaching an agreement with Kolomitz that his service as a paid campaign worker would end on Jan. 31, 2007. Any political services Kolomitz provided after that were on a volunteer basis, the governor said.

The disputed checks were written by Kolomitz between Dec. 27, 2006 and Oct. 24, 2007.

Kolomitz has declined to comment publicly on whether he understood the verbal agreement differently. He has also not said why he felt entitled to money in addition to the $195,000 he was paid to manage Ritter's campaign and serve as executive director of the governor's inaugural committee.

Another impediment in filing criminal charges is that the money is no longer missing, Gessler said. Kolomitz paid the $83,250 back to the inaugural fund when Ritter asked him to and a day before the governor went public with the mess.

Ritter turned the matter over to the secretary of state, the attorney general and the Denver district attorney, who forwarded it to Chambers citing a conflict of interest.

Ritter has put up his house as collateral for a $200,000 loan to pay 28 campaign vendors that he says Kolomitz improperly paid out of the inaugural fund.

The governor said Kolomitz appears to have violated campaign finance law because money donated for the inauguration can't be used to cover campaign expenses.

Yet, Secretary of State Mike Coffman may not have a case against Kolomitz either.

State campaign finance laws require a formal complaint to trigger an investigation. No complaint has been filed. And the state Constitution bars Coffman from investigating any alleged violation that happened more than 180 days prior to the complaint.

Kolomitz wrote all of the $217,000 in checks for campaign expenses out of the inaugural fund more than six months ago, an audit shows. And only one of the checks he wrote to himself or his firm falls within the 180-day limit. That check for $350 is dated Oct. 24, 2007 - 177 days before today.

With that check, Kolomitz drew the inaugural account that once held $1.1 million down to $69.06.

Ritter has taken responsibility for what he sees as his role in the fiasco. "It's not even a question for us that it was a lack of oversight and a lack of controls," spokesman Evan Dreyer said Thursday.

Kolomitz has publicly apologized for any harm he have caused Ritter. The longtime Colorado political operative has stopped short, however, of explaining why he paid himself $83,250 over and above what Ritter says Kolomitz was owed.

Attorney General John Suthers is also reviewing the case but only has jurisdiction over the question of whether the Ritter Inaugural Committee violated laws governing not-for-profit organizations.

A government watchdog group said it's time to tighten oversight of how inaugural funds are raised and spent.

"We don't have a problem with celebrating an inauguration, but we do have concerns there's unlimited funds being raised that aren't subject to our campaign finance disclosure laws," said Elena Nunez, program director for Colorado Common Cause.

bargec@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5059

Major donors to Ritter Inaugural Fund

The Bill Ritter Inaugural Committee, which Greg Kolomitz directed, raised more than $1.1 million in a hurry after Ritter was elected governor. A list of the major donors ($20,000 and above):

Qwest $25,000

HCA Continental Division Inc. $25,000

Brownstein Hyatt Farber $23,500

Xcel Energy $22,000

Forest City Stapleton Inc. $21,200

United Food & Commercial Workers $20,000

Isle of Capri Casino Black Hawk $20,000

FirstBank $20,000

Coors Brewing Co. $20,000

Comcast $20,000

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America $20,000

North American Power Group Ltd. $20,000

Hogan & Hartson LLP $20,000

EDS $20,000

CH2M Hill Inc. $20,000

Gateway American Properties LLC $20,000

Western Union Financial Services Inc. $20,000

Hensel Phelps Construction Co. $20,000

Level 3 Communications $20,000

Comments

  • April 18, 2008

    7:15 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    becket writes:

    You people ask for Ritter, now live with him. Another corupt Democrat. Wow what a surprise.

  • April 18, 2008

    7:30 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    GK writes:

    Oh please...We've lived with corrupt Republics for years, this pales in comparison.

  • April 18, 2008

    7:36 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    rickg19611 writes:

    Ritter has to be the most incompetent moron to ever hold public office. What kind of moron "attorney" doesn't believe in signing contracts?

    This is the same bunch of criminals that gave sweetheart deals to drug dealers so they wouldn't get deported.

    ANOTHER, in an endless list, of examples of how Democrats are criminals.

  • April 18, 2008

    8:32 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Darwin writes:

    Democrats or Republicans, they all come from the same corrupt, dishonest cloth. Now they can even skate around the legal system. Scumbags all. BigJake, you are right to cling to your guns.

  • April 18, 2008

    9:03 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Newenergycommie writes:

    Just wait until his radical enviromenatist picks for the PUC start to get into your pocket. This $83,000 will seem like peanuts. How bad will it be. Check the prices and tax levels in California.

  • April 18, 2008

    9:37 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    olsonmt writes:

    If he does get charged will the DA plea bargain it to an agricultural trespassing charge? I suspect no. You must have to be a heroin-dealing, child-molesting illegal hispanic immigrant to get offer that deal. $83k to one man for planning a party? If it wasn't embezellment, it sure as hell would have been a waste of taxpayer's money.

  • April 18, 2008

    9:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    olsonmt writes:

    GK, please give us examples of the corrupt Republicans. I would like to see if this does in fact pale in comparison. Nothing is coming to mind right now.

  • April 18, 2008

    11:55 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    olsonmt writes:

    I was thinking State Republicans so I should have been more clear. National politics are a whole new debate. So i'll take your Bill Owens example as the most comparable to the current issue with Ritter and Kolomitz. Did Owens actually sell Colorado? I just made out my income tax check so if it isn't supposed to be going to the State then I need to know ASAP! If he did sell it, was he able to make a nice big check out to himself? I must have missed the audit and internal investigation that revealed that big scandal. You may not have liked Owens' political decisions, but I am still looking for his or his immediate advisors' criminal behavior.

  • April 18, 2008

    12:01 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    olsonmt writes:

    And how you fools elected a man who made a career on "agricultural tresspass" deals is beyond me. Let's clear the case log boys. We don't want to deal with some nasty heroin charge or immegration status. That's way too complicated. Don't worry, some little girl in CA worry can deal with it. One of 600+ such deals.